Skip to main content

About your Search

20130116
20130116
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
, if they extend the limits, the debt ceiling limit and do something more, maybe not a grand compromise, something more in terms of deficit reduction, my guess is the market will kind of shrug it off. they won't get upset. the issue is in the end what happens in the run-up read the political run-up to the waiter with the market reacting as we are going down the wire because they will not default. the u.s. will not default on its debt. adam: you have the billionaire coke brothers urging the g.o.p. all kinds of g.o.p. senator saying we need not have this fight. wouldn't it be better for republicans since the issue is spending will agree it is spending, spending, spending. wait until march as our producer calls it the son of the fiscal cliff. say to the president okay. you want to fund spending? refunded if the suit was about cutting spending slipknot to the continuing resolution. would that be the better argument? >> fair enough. the issue is this, you are right in saying we have to deal on the spending side as well as the tax side. with my preference would be if comprehensive entitlement reform, co
'll be back in 15 minutes. tracy: the dance over extending the debt ceiling in washington is on as lawmakers on both sides of the file fight over issues like deficit spending and things we've been talking about for years now. rich edson is in washington with more. any progress, rich? >> no. with about a month or so. ashley: rich, thank you. >> back to you. look we've got about a month left before the government reaches the debt ceiling and the two sides are as far apart as they ever been. democrats say congress routinely increases debt ceiling. it allows the federal government to pay for spending it already approved. they say deficit reduction is different argument and they're now proposing eliminating the debt ceiling. >> we must not permit an artificial debt ceiling to throw the country into default and our economy into chaos and depression which is exactly what the republicans are threatening to do. it is time to abolish the debt ceiling and our levels of taxation and spending will be set as they always have been by congressional action. >> republicans argue washington has linked several
, that we're having to raise the debt ceiling, to meet them, i would argue that is a sign that government has grown too big, and over extending itself, and trying to do too much. neil: michael to that point. and same -- what do you think? >> i'm sorry, a lot of talking points in there. which point? >> well you could repeat any of your talking points, i'm asking you to point we keep doing this same thing, expecting a different result? >> well, look, a lot of what has us here is tax cuts, and i know you don'tment to hearment want t taxes are low. neil: just keep raising them? >> we need a combination, a planned approach -- neil: like a 40 to 1 tax hike to spending cut deal. >> are you kidding? we've done $1.8 trillion of spending cuts. >> woe okay woe, wait, where are these spending cuts, they are always in the future, all in the future. actual spending we spending 25 pierc25%more now. >> you have to cut it in the future. neil: we have spend a hell of a lot of time talking over one another that always helps me, when we come back, get the flu shot or another job? can a boss do that. several
it as such should have been. i think we should extend if not end the debt ceiling issue. we should just set it aside for a considerable period of time. we should tackle sequestration and we have to do that in the next six weeks. so i'm hopeful that we don't drag this out as some people are saying and then move on to serious discussion of tax reform and entitlement issues. so i see it in a sense the opposite way. i say let it is done, the sequestration part in the debt ceiling in the next six weeks and then move on. those who are you saying let's do a triple by drivel, they are the ones who would be undermining the effort to sit down and had a serious discussion of tax reform. >> we have about two minutes left. francine. >> the question itemized reductions. what is your thought of having a cap and itemized deductions that people use for whatever they want. mortgage or a charity or whatever. >> i think the problem with a cat is that it has to seriously consequence, especially for charitable contributions. because a substantial portion of the charitable contributions come from the very wealthy. i think
, the opposite is what should happen. we should extend if not end of the debt ceil i
should happen. i think we should, we should extend be not end the debt ceiling issue. we should just set it aside for a considerable period of time. we should tackle sequestration, and we have to do that in the next six weeks. so i'm hopeful that we don't drag this out as some people are saying. b and then move on to a serious discussion of tax reform. and entitlement issues. so i see it in a sense the opposite way. i say let's get this done, the sequestration part and the debt ceiling, in the next six weeks and then move on. those who are saying let's do it dribble by dribble, they're the ones who would be undermining the effort to sit down and have a serious discussion of tax reform in the entitlements. >> we've got about two minutes left. francine. >> specific question about, um, itemized deductions. what's your thought on having a cap on itemized deductions but people can use it for whatever they want? they can use it for mortgage or charitable or whatever. >> i think the problem with a cap is that it has too serious a consequence especially for charitable contributions. because a su
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)